Google on track to outspend banks, big tobacco in lobbying

Google has spent over $5 million lobbying in Washington, putting it on track …

Google spent $5.03 million on lobbying in the first quarter of the year, the New York Times reported Monday. According to filings with the US House of Representatives, the company's spending represents a 240 percent increase from a year ago. It's a possible reflection of Google's increased struggles with government agencies and privacy advocates over its business practices, but also of its crusade against PIPA and SOPA.

From January to March of this year, Google spent over $5 million on lobbying, nearly matching its entire 2010 lobbying budget of $5.2 million. If the company maintains this pace, it will likely earn itself a spot as one of the top ten spending entities for the year as logged by Open Secrets. Comparing this same rate with 2011 figures, Google would outspend the entire tobacco industry ($17.07 million), the combined spending of JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo, and Citigroup ($18.67 million), but would be just barely behind the combined budgets of pharmaceutical giants Pfizer and Merck ($20.685 million). For comparison, Apple spent only $500,000 for the same 2012 quarter; Microsoft spent $1.79 million.

Google's spending may look excessive on the surface, but it's important to note the company also spent some $4 million lobbying against SOPA and PIPA, two bills that overreached in their restrictive powers with the purported goal of stopping content piracy, according to CNN. If the company chooses not to continue the fight against CISPA and other bills similar to SOPA and PIPA that rise in their wake, its spending may drop off for the rest of the year.

45 Reader Comments

Lobbying should be completely illegal. Its complete farce, yet people are brainwashed that its normal.Its basically bribing.Politicians should have a salary of average of their constituents plus 50%. Public service needs to be public service, not personal enrichment.

Google's spending may look excessive on the surface, but it's important to note the company also spent some $4 million lobbying against SOPA and PIPA, two bills that overreached in their restrictive powers with the purported goal of stopping content piracy, according to CNN.

Lobbying should be completely illegal. Its complete farce, yet people are brainwashed that its normal.Its basically bribing.Politicians should have a salary of average of their constituents plus 50%. Public service needs to be public service, not personal enrichment.

Considering US senators have an average net worth of ~$13,989,000, I don't think they are there for the $174,000 salary.

Lobbying should be completely illegal. Its complete farce, yet people are brainwashed that its normal.Its basically bribing.Politicians should have a salary of average of their constituents plus 50%. Public service needs to be public service, not personal enrichment.

No problem! We'll just get those rich lawmakers to change the system and- er... um... hmmm.

Lobbying should be completely illegal. Its complete farce, yet people are brainwashed that its normal.Its basically bribing.Politicians should have a salary of average of their constituents plus 50%. Public service needs to be public service, not personal enrichment.

Considering US senators have an average net worth of ~$13,989,000, I don't think they are there for the $174,000 salary.

Yes, thats how they are worth millions, via bribes called lobbying. Revolving door of corporations and US Government.

@kot_matroskin: Sympathetic to your objectives but how do we define what is lobbying? Should politicians never be allowed to speak with industrial leaders? Should they never get advice from those experienced in the field of business? Should politicians only speak to private citizens? I can just imagine it - the CEO of Google or some other huge company, contacting his senators "as a concerned citizen"...

Some differences between companies that lobby, and most private citizens, is:1. Willingness to get in touch with their political representatives,2. Know-how in getting their message through to political representatives,3. Companies actually record the money they spend - including apportioned employee time and telephone bills (if they record & report their accounting properly).

1 and 2 are problems. 3 is one area where businesses are more forthright than private citizens. There's a proper way to do this (contacting politicians about genuine concerns, and framing them in a concise and balanced way within the proper context), and an improper way to do this ("entertaining" politicians etc.)

"Help us politicians. We broke all the rules and laws you guys created based on previous bribes (err, lobbying), and now we want you to change them in our favor so we are not held liable."

Thanks Casey, for the hater-bait. This gentlemen is a good example.

Lets take an unusual, one-time (lets hope) event, SOPA, in which Google spends 4 million dollars of a 5.03 million dollar budget successfully fighting, and then assume, against all evidence, that they'll spend that much THREE MORE TIMES this year and then compare THAT made up number to industries that are "bad", like tobacco companies (hiss), big banks (boo), and drug manufacturers (eww). Then admit that most of the money went towards helping the internet. So why make the painfully convoluted statement in the first place, if not to write a click-bait headline?

So... another made-up way to look at it is that, minus the one-time SOPA fighting costs, Microsoft spent 1 3/4 times MORE than Google this quarter, despite the fact that Google was dealing with a butt-load of federal issues and Microsoft was... doing what exactly? Making new friends...

So... despite the Ars' stated dislike for SOPA, when shown evidence that Google ponied up big bucks to defeat it, you use that number and accuse them of playing politics. Nicely done Ars. Fair and balanced.

@kot_matroskin: Sympathetic to your objectives but how do we define what is lobbying?

Oh, very simple. Lobbying is when money exchanges hands between politicians and what have you, be it corporations or megabillionares (Who often head such coroprations).Add sweet deals to bribes, and you have full circle. There is plenty of information about it, just Google if you really care (the most basic example being that white collar crooks at worst get a slap on the wrist for their crimes (bankers in the 2008 scandal, JnJ for screwing up with Tylenol, big oil, big pharma, hollywood, telco) the list is endless, while your typical joe q public gets harassed by hollywood for uploading a song to his/her friend). The revolving door between corporations and politicians is whats destroying whats left of middle class in the US of A, and the rest of the so called western world. (Always existed in third world).

Oh, very simple. Lobbying is when money exchanges hands between politicians and what have you, be it corporations or megabillionares (Who often head such coroprations).

But, that is already illegal. Actual lobbying in the real world consists either of PR items like advertising, campaigning and organizing, or things with no tangible cash value but make a politician's job much easier IF they agree with you: things like research papers, draft legislation, expert advice, coordinating logrolling deals with other lawmakers, and so on.

Lobbying should be completely illegal. Its complete farce, yet people are brainwashed that its normal.Its basically bribing.Politicians should have a salary of average of their constituents plus 50%. Public service needs to be public service, not personal enrichment.

Considering US senators have an average net worth of ~$13,989,000, I don't think they are there for the $174,000 salary.

@kot_matroskin: Sympathetic to your objectives but how do we define what is lobbying?

Oh, very simple. Lobbying is when money exchanges hands between politicians and what have you, be it corporations or megabillionares (Who often head such coroprations).Add sweet deals to bribes, and you have full circle. There is plenty of information about it, just Google if you really care (the most basic example being that white collar crooks at worst get a slap on the wrist for their crimes (bankers in the 2008 scandal, JnJ for screwing up with Tylenol, big oil, big pharma, hollywood, telco) the list is endless, while your typical joe q public gets harassed by hollywood for uploading a song to his/her friend). The revolving door between corporations and politicians is whats destroying whats left of middle class in the US of A, and the rest of the so called western world. (Always existed in third world).

$5M a quarter. If that were to buy every single vote in the house, that would be over $20k per representative over the first 3 months.

hmm ... that is some downright frightening bang for buck. These are people who will decide at their own discretion how 3,600,000 million per year will be burned. It is a wonder that there actually isn't more lobbying.

This is interesting, but Google is still way behind more entrenched influence players. Here's the Open Secrets overview for 2011. The list tops with the US Chamber of Commerce, which spent $66 million, ten times what Google did.

Despite popular perceptions, lobbying is one of the more honest ways to exert influence on legislatures.

The revolving door, such as a FCC chair who goes to work for telecom, or a Senator who leaves office to a fat post running copyright law, are much more damaging. Campaign contributions are another, more insidious vector for influence.

Lobbying is frequently helpful to legislators, who desperately need access to subject matter experts. The question is, whose lobbyists? And that gets you to the question of who your elected officials are working for. Hint: would you bend you principals to multiply your salary by 10x at a post-office sinecure? Do the math. It's hard to say no.

"Help us politicians. We broke all the rules and laws you guys created based on previous bribes (err, lobbying), and now we want you to change them in our favor so we are not held liable."

Sounds like Google has been spending on par with Microsoft and then spent another $4 million on behalf of you and I, so we can enjoy an open Internet. This world could use a few more companies as 'evil' as Google.

Lobbying should be completely illegal. Its complete farce, yet people are brainwashed that its normal.Its basically bribing.Politicians should have a salary of average of their constituents plus 50%. Public service needs to be public service, not personal enrichment.

there's nothing intrinsically wrong about Political Action Committees and lobbying. The whole point is to get your message in front of law makers, and hiring someone to do that on your behalf, because you either are too busy to do it yourself, or in the case of many grass-roots organizations, you can't afford to.

If you're a member of a professional organization, or pretty-much any other national organization, you have somebody lobbying on your behalf in DC.

Big numbers but since it were $4B for SOPA/PIPA I'm kind of OK with it....But Lobbying should have like a required 50% cut to a what-ever-do-goodie-non-profit-thing...Or perhaps make that 99%, like the (somewhat stupid) "retake ME" Child's play thing....

Or just for simplicity's sake illegal, or force branded as "sort-of-legal-bribes" in the companies financial reports...

"Help us politicians. We broke all the rules and laws you guys created based on previous bribes (err, lobbying), and now we want you to change them in our favor so we are not held liable."

Thanks Casey, for the hater-bait. This gentlemen is a good example.

Lets take an unusual, one-time (lets hope) event, SOPA, in which Google spends 4 million dollars of a 5.03 million dollar budget successfully fighting, and then assume, against all evidence, that they'll spend that much THREE MORE TIMES this year and then compare THAT made up number to industries that are "bad", like tobacco companies (hiss), big banks (boo), and drug manufacturers (eww). Then admit that most of the money went towards helping the internet. So why make the painfully convoluted statement in the first place, if not to write a click-bait headline?

So... another made-up way to look at it is that, minus the one-time SOPA fighting costs, Microsoft spent 1 3/4 times MORE than Google this quarter, despite the fact that Google was dealing with a butt-load of federal issues and Microsoft was... doing what exactly? Making new friends...

So... despite the Ars' stated dislike for SOPA, when shown evidence that Google ponied up big bucks to defeat it, you use that number and accuse them of playing politics. Nicely done Ars. Fair and balanced.

This place has gone to shit. It used to be stories about processor architecture. Now it's crap like this or guides to cartoons teenage retards publish on the Internet.

"Help us politicians. We broke all the rules and laws you guys created based on previous bribes (err, lobbying), and now we want you to change them in our favor so we are not held liable."

Thanks Casey, for the hater-bait. This gentlemen is a good example.

Lets take an unusual, one-time (lets hope) event, SOPA, in which Google spends 4 million dollars of a 5.03 million dollar budget successfully fighting, and then assume, against all evidence, that they'll spend that much THREE MORE TIMES this year and then compare THAT made up number to industries that are "bad", like tobacco companies (hiss), big banks (boo), and drug manufacturers (eww). Then admit that most of the money went towards helping the internet. So why make the painfully convoluted statement in the first place, if not to write a click-bait headline?

So... another made-up way to look at it is that, minus the one-time SOPA fighting costs, Microsoft spent 1 3/4 times MORE than Google this quarter, despite the fact that Google was dealing with a butt-load of federal issues and Microsoft was... doing what exactly? Making new friends...

So... despite the Ars' stated dislike for SOPA, when shown evidence that Google ponied up big bucks to defeat it, you use that number and accuse them of playing politics. Nicely done Ars. Fair and balanced.

This place has gone to shit. It used to be stories about processor architecture. Now it's crap like this or guides to cartoons teenage retards publish on the Internet.

Wow shortsighted much? I want to discuss processor architecture but I'll stick my head in the the sand when the power structures that govern the industry working on that stuff are mentioned.

Well... what choice does one have in the 'Champion of Democracy' US of A? You have the choice between 'glass is half full' Party and 'glass is half empty' Party. There are some differences - but mainly the level of liquid in the glass is about the same.

Policy is not decided based on votes. Policy is based on the amount of dollars involved. Lobbying helps lubricate channels, but you still have to show effect on dollar amounts.

Godwin Edit: isn't it funny that in 2012, 70 years after the Wannsee conference (where the Final Solution was decided), Germany is more democratic than the USA? What if someone predicted in 1942 that policy would be decided by business and interest groups giving money to politicians?

"Those who count on quote 'Hollywood' for support need to understand that this industry is watching very carefully who's going to stand up for them when their job is at stake. Don't ask me to write a check for you when you think your job is at risk and then don't pay any attention to me when my job is at stake,"

Apologies to those who are not US citizens and those hoping for another tech jolt. This issue is a mutant cancer on the future of the United States. The US Congress should be called Bribes-Are-US. Some might call it a tradition. I believe it was said last century, 'We have the best Congress money can buy'. Congress recently raced to enact Insider Trading legislation after members pocketed millions(?) on -- Insider Trading.

My proposal is a peaceful, simple one that perhaps 99% can embrace. Let's all boycott future Congressional elections. If Congress seriously cleans up its Ethics, then we'll vote again -- not before. If a candidate sweeps into office with a 70% mandate but the vote is 7 to 3, our so-called democracy might get the wake-up call it needs and deserves.

Apologies to those who are not US citizens and those hoping for another tech jolt. This issue is a mutant cancer on the future of the United States. The US Congress should be called Bribes-Are-US. Some might call it a tradition. I believe it was said last century, 'We have the best Congress money can buy'. Congress recently raced to enact Insider Trading legislation after members pocketed millions(?) on -- Insider Trading.

My proposal is a peaceful, simple one that perhaps 99% can embrace. Let's all boycott future Congressional elections. If Congress seriously cleans up its Ethics, then we'll vote again -- not before. If a candidate sweeps into office with a 70% mandate but the vote is 7 to 3, our so-called democracy might get the wake-up call it needs and deserves.

Back to tech international...

Don't worry friend it happens everywhere else as well... take a look at the history of the Lockheed corporation to see the bribery/lobbying/whatever you want to call it pandemic.

I didn't mean that the US had a lock on the business of bribery. Apparently or all-American Walmart has been bribing in Mexico for a decade. Bribery should be eradicated worldwide as much as possible.

When the US invades a country for the purpose of 'bringing Democracy', I almost tossed my cookies. Local citizen: "Bribery? Yes, I believe we understand already."

What I'm suggesting is US citizens non-violently put real pressure on Washington to change via an election boycott. If it works here, maybe each country/state should try. Our Occupy movements have the right idea but so far few are listening.

I'm honestly not sure that's true. Bribery has a valid purpose in liquidating the processes where ossified bureaucracies are slow to react to pressing issues. I'm not saying it's good that bribery exists, but it often exists for good reason.